Analysis of 5/19/09 California Proposition Results

Link to county by county map of returns for each proposition
http://projects.latimes.com/elections/2009-05-19/california-propositions/results/map/

My not so scientific analysis of the country by county votes. I did this my analyzing the county by county map in the link above. I was curious about how different areas of the state tend to vote.

Prop1A – Rainy Day Fund(34% Yes, 66% No)
Counties that voted more than 40% Yes: Sonoma, Yolo, Marin, San Mateo, Contra Costa, Alameda, Monterey, Santa Cruz, Imperial (south eastern most)

Purpose: in addition to creating a so called rainy day fund, the measure would have extended billions of dollars of tax increases on sales, income, and vehicle taxes for up to two years.

Prop1B – Education Funding (38% Yes, 62% No)
Santa Clara was the only county to vote Yes. Many counties were very close to a Yes on this measure.

Purpose: To claw back recent cuts in funding for education. Obviously, this was supported by the California Teachers Assn.

Prop1C – Modernize Lottery (35% Yes, 65% No)
All counties voted No. Voting against this was more widespread, although states that voted agiast it most strongly tended to be away from the coast and non-greater Bay Area. Imperial County in south eastern California was an outlier again. It voted 47% Yes 53% No.

Purpose: To allow state officials to borrow $5 billion against future lottery earnings.

Prop1D – Child Services Funding (34% Yes, 66% No)
All counties voted No. Voting pattern similar to Prop1C

Purpose: To shift about $1.7B away from early childhood development programs to balance the state’s budget. I have no idea what “childhood development” is.

Prop1E – Mental Health Budget (34% Yes, 66% No)
All counties voted No. Voting pattern similar to Prop1C

Purpose: To temporarily shift money away from a mental health program established by voters in 2004, paid for with a 1% tax on personal income above $1 million.

Prop1F – Elected Official Salaries (74% Yes, 26% No)
All counties voted Yes. This prop differed from the other props in that a Yes vote was a vote agaist the government and against higher taxes. Interestingly, Imperial county, which tented to have a very strong Yes vote on all of the other props, voted 75% Yes for 1F. Contrary to what I expected, many of the Bay Area counties with had the strongest Yes votes for the other props, had very strong Yes votes for this proposition.

Purpose: To prevent pay raises for legislators and statewide officeholders in deficit years.

I did not vote in the recent proposition contest in California as I am leaving the state soon and I could care less. Part of the reason I am leaving the state is that I cannot stand the high tax rates, from the sales tax, to the income tax, to parking tickets, to speeding tickets, to the cost of living out here. However, I do find the results interesting.